A misleading story

Seeing a doctor is becoming a luxury item as housing costs take a toll on family budgets, Christchurch social agencies say.

“We have a number of families who don’t even take their children to the GP until they get really sick and often that’s because they’ve got debts and doctors sometimes won’t see a family until they have cleared previous debts,” Christchurch Methodist Mission executive director Jill Hawkey said.

I don’t know of any GP that will refuse to see a child because the family owe them money. They may ask the parents to arrange to pay their debts, but they won’t refuse to see a child.

One family with an outstanding bill of $30 were threatened by debt collectors with fees in excess of $1000 unless they paid up, she said.

It is worth remembering that taxpayers not subsidise free GP visits for children up to the age of 13.

This story is based on anecdotes and claims by an NGO. It would be a better story if it referenced actual data, such as the annual NZ Health Survey by the Ministry of Health. The latest survey finds:

children who did not visit a GP due to cost in the last year decreased from 6.3% to 5.2%

children who did not visit an after hours service due to cost decreased from 4.5% to 3.6%

I’m not saying there shouldn’t be an article on the claims that some families can’t afford primary healthcare. What I’m saying is that the article just repeated claims that had no substance, and didn’t seek out any data that contradicts that.

Sir Cullen's Sidekick

Boris Piscina

DPF, you have probably just inadvertently explained why National lost the Northland byelection, and you have done so with one simple sentence, that being “That sounds preposterous, and I doubt it.”

You doubt it because nothing like it touches your world, and in fairness it doesn’t touch most New Zealanders; but that doesn’t mean it’s not real. It does affect more than a few people. Plenty of ordinary simple folk actually just don’t know that doctors’ visits are free for under 13s now. That may be their own fault, or it may be no-one’s fault and simply a side-effect of the whole lower socio-economic condition. You can’t legislate to make ignorance and stupidity go away, but by the same token you can’t use those things as a reason for denying the existence of their downstream influences.

This Government, like plenty before it, has become disconnected from the reality that affects the marginalised and the downtrodden. It is one thing to decide you don’t care about the lot of the bottom feeders, but quite another to deny the very truth of their plight – whatever its cause. This is one step removed from “Let them eat cake”, and we all know how that ended.

Fact is that debt collectors do eventually arrive at outrageous charges. The people who were facing a $1,000 penalty for a $30 unpaid bill had probably ignored 17 or more final warnings, and had probably spent that $30 30 times over on cigarettes and alcohol and takeaways, but the reality of the ultimate repercussion of that will very probably be true nonetheless.

I’m not condoning the behaviour of the irresponsible lower end of society, but neither will I question the reality of the life they live – and I do think that our Party, particularly its influential, have either forgotten that reality, or, like yourself, come to question it.

The Leadership, I believe, has similarly become disconnected from the perception – real or otherwise – of people in the provinces, with regards to their relative economic position. That is why we lost Northland. It should stand as a very clear warning.

Anthony

Everything is always the government’s fault – no one is able to look after themselves anymore!

That is one reason why I stopped getting the Dom Post – every second day the front page headline was some sob story and just about always it was the government’s fault!

I’d respect a politician who stood up and said politicians are far too involved in every aspect of peoples’ lives and it was best the government focused on getting the basics right and let people to get on with things.

dave_c_

Spot on Boris – There are none so blind as those who will not see !. It would do people like this some good to get down from their (self perceived) high and lofty positions, and see exactly what some parts of the real world are really like.

Souvlaki

I concur with Boris above. Having been on the coal face of the provision of “healthcare” for more than 35 years I speak with considerable experience. People genuinely appear these days to be” dumbed down”…..regularly demonstrating an inability to deal with the most rudimentary self care, that 30 years ago would have seemed inconceivable. Stuck in the corridors of power…one is truly removed from this type of situation,and I can see how one could dismiss it as”unbelievable”. Unless we somehow encourage greater self reliance ( as our forebears had),we are going to be swamped by the tide. The article on some of the stupid things people consulted their GP for in the UK the other day exemplifies the problem eg. Getting your GP to change the batteries in your TV remote!!.

Straight arrow

nasska

Okay. Here we have the great unwashed who are too bloody thick to change batteries or realise that their wretched offspring have access to free medical care.

What do Boris or Dave (above), or for that matter the Christchurch Methodist Mission, suggest that the Government actually DO about it. You can’t legislate for higher IQ’s amongst the breeding classes & matters eugenic are rightly left to the Nazis.

dave_c_

Some doctors and medical centres are nothing but greedy charlatans.
My 84 year old mother has to pay $47 per visit to her doctor (irrespective of the reasons why)
She asked the doctor why he has not signed up to the government scheme which subsidises visits. His answer was the he did not consider it in his interests to do so. (and she does not live inan affluent area)
We pay $17 per visit (and are more than capable of paying more)
Come on ! Who’ll be the first to defend this inquitous inequality ?

dave_c_

nasska

…..” Pull your head out of your ass, and find the answer/s for yourself”….

I’ll see what I can do. While I’m about it why don’t you take your 84 year old mother gently by the hand & help her locate a doctor who has signed up to the government scheme which subsidises visits? I’m sure that there’s a few located here & there throughout NZ.

Or is it easier to bitch that the “Gummint” should do something about it?

Adolf Fiinkensein

dave_c_

Nasska – You should be asking the question, why is that most (I can speak from personal experience) doctors are unwilling to take on more patients, as their books are (so called) full.
No doubt you’d think it would be an ok situation if she had to travel 50km’s or more to receive the benefits available to many others !
And don’t be so condescending – I never mentioned that I thought the “Gummint” (your pathetic words) should do something about it. I’m just highlighting an inequity that I think is avoidable, and wrong.

nasska

…..” why is that most (I can speak from personal experience) doctors are unwilling to take on more patients, as their books are (so called) full.”….

Supply & demand. After many gruelling years of work & study the prospect of working as a GP is a lousy financial option. Doctor’s are self employed professionals & need to be paid accordingly.

….” I’m just highlighting an inequity that I think is avoidable, and wrong.”….

Without offering any solutions. How can it be avoided? How can the wrong be made right? Short of the Powers that Be forcing medical graduates to become GP’s or forcing existing doctors to take on more patients than they can safely handle I see little that can be done at a government level.

Nostradamus

dave_c_:

My 84 year old mother has to pay $47 per visit to her doctor (irrespective of the reasons why)

Hmmm… this matter requires a bit more investigation.

1. Does your mother receive the pension, Dave? Yes?
2. And is there anything stopping you from paying the bill, Dave? No?
3. Oh, and Dave? Is there anything stopping you from driving your mother to another doctor where (as Nasska rightly asks) you’d receive subsidised medical care? No?

RossM

dave_c_

Nostradamus
1) yes she receives a pension
2) Nothing stopping us paying the bill – and we often do (along with other assistance) – I am just making the point that this is a typical issue for many, who cannot access resonably priced healthcare in their local communities.
3) Indeed there is a reason why we cant do that – She lives 300 kms from us.

I notice that you are just as condescending as Nasska –
“Investigation closed. Next.” what arrogance – you have no idea, and possibly no inclination to understand the issues many deal with on a frequent basis.

louie

Like DPF my reaction to the article was disbelief. Looking at others comments, eg Souvlaki 3:13 I’m prepared to believe there are people so stupid they can’t/won’t/don’t act like adults and act in their own interests.
What bugs me about the article is that it is just a presentation of the whining. Not a single note about the validity of the whining, what they could have done, what is available etc. This type of journalist seems like those that delay executions to get a better camera angle. Sadly more and more common.

Nostradamus

Now, at 3:59pm, you wrote ” I’m just highlighting an inequity that I think is avoidable, and wrong.”

The key word there is “avoidable”.

So, first off, your mother receives a pension. The taxpayer contributes generously towards her life expenses. Second, by your own admission, you pay the bill. And you haven’t provided any evidence that doctors refuse to see patients – particularly children – who can’t afford to pay the bill (which, after all, is what this thread was about). And, third, if your mother lives 300 kms away from you, and she lives an independent life (with a generous taxpayer-funded pension), then what’s your problem?

itstricky

It is worth remembering that taxpayers now subsidise free GP visits for children up to the age of 13.

The article appears very scatter-brained – here, there and everywhere. It’s not, however, all about children. They are drawing a comparison between (free) ED access and A/H medical centres (at cost) for families, in general, including the elderly.

I’m not saying there shouldn’t be an article on the claims that some families can’t afford primary healthcare. What I’m saying is that the article just repeated claims that had no substance, and didn’t seek out any data that contradicts that.

Your counter claims appear to be:

I don’t know of any GP that will refuse to see a child because the family owe them money andThat sounds preposterous, and I doubt it.

That’s hardly rock solid evidence, either. That’s personal opinion.

And here:

children who did not visit a GP due to cost in the last year decreased from 6.3% to 5.2%
children who did not visit an after hours service due to cost decreased from 4.5% to 3.6%

You’ve focused on children, which is not primarily what the article was about.

If you look at adults, “unmet needs to due A/H service cost” has increased since the last survey.

dime

greenjacket

The Press sadly regularly prints unverified claims about poverty. Fairfax journalists just reprint the press releases of NGOs – basic journalism (i.e. checking the sources) is beyond them.
This is one of the reasons why I don’t bother with Fairfax or APN media anymore – if I want to read the press releases of organisations I can go to their website, so why bother reading the paper?

PaulP

I call BS on the $1,000 fees for a $30 debt.

Nor not because it can’t or doesn’t happen but because if it did in this circumstance the journalist would have gladly named and shamed the doctor/medical practice. That the journo didn’t speaks volumes to me about it being BS.

MCos

I have epilepsy. The doctor plus medication costs me $27 every three months. When I was living in Thailand the medication cost $450 alone every three months. Health insurance paid nothing. As far as I’m concerned I’ve got nothing to complain about with our public health service.

Richard II

You’ve focused on children, which is not primarily what the article was about.

-itstricky

This. It’s clear from the article that some children in Christchurch are not taken to the doctor because of current family debt preventing it, despite visits being free for under 6’s.

That does not stop David Farrar quoting the national statistics (not those from Christchurch when he knows this is a Christchurch story and that Christchurch faces unique problems at the moment) published by a government with a track record of manipulating or burying statistics harmful to themselves.

prosper

If doctors are motivated by money and most are to some extent then general practice is a very unattractive proposition. This has become even less attractive in recent years as the naive doctors keep accepting handouts from the government and have now in effect become public servants enjoying about the same level of respect. Until this changes less and less medical graduates will opt for general practice. It’s a pretty boring job anyway.

The solution is for the doctor to charge at the same rate as a lawyer and the patient to hAve medical insurance subsidised by the governmen. This is the system in the Netherlands.